What you say is true. But who gave you the dermination to pass the code in order
to qualify? Only you.
73, Ed
-------------------------------------
Name: ed sleight
E-mail: k4sb@avana.net
Time: 03:11:34
This message was sent by Chameleon
-------------------------------------
>From WX0B-JTERLESKI@worldnet.att.net (Jay Terleski) Sun May 26 16:36:21 1996
From: WX0B-JTERLESKI@worldnet.att.net (Jay Terleski) (Jay Terleski)
Subject: Italy visit
Message-ID: <199605261536.PAA12375@mailhost.worldnet.att.net>
I shall be visit/working in Avezzano and Rome Arriving This Wed and leaving
on Wed after May 29-June 5. I would like to get in touch with contesters in
the area for a visit.
Jay WX0B
>From wb4iuy@nando.net (Dave Hockaday) Sun May 26 17:56:36 1996
From: wb4iuy@nando.net (Dave Hockaday) (Dave Hockaday)
Subject: Invisible pet fence
Message-ID: <199605261656.MAA22826@parsifal.nando.net>
My neighbor is about to install an underground "invisible fence" for his
pets...within 15 feet of one of my tower guys. Does anyone out there have
experience with interference from these things??
I have a lowfer beacon on 166.667 khz, and a neighbor's fence 2 blocks over
destroys my lf reception, and I wonder what this is gonna do to me on 160,
75, etc...
Any input is appreciated
73 de Dave Hockaday WB4IUY
wb4iuy@nando.net
http://www.webbuild.com/~wb4iuy/
http://www.webbuild.com/~wb4iuy/teara.html
http://www.RTPnet.org/~fcarc/
http://www.RTPnet.org/~rdrc/
http://www.geocities.com/TheTropics/3349/
http://www.geocities.com/TheTropics/3489/
http://www.geocities.com/TheTropics/3341/
http://www.geocities.com/TheTropics/3212/
>From knupke@babbage.csee.usf.edu (KR4YL) Sun May 26 18:19:30 1996
From: knupke@babbage.csee.usf.edu (KR4YL) (KR4YL)
Subject: testing Q&A
Message-ID: <Pine.SUN.3.92.960526131558.15591A-100000@babbage>
On Sat, 25 May 1996, Douglas Zwiebel wrote:
> Recently SOMEONE said:
> >If you are given the book, with all the questions, and all the answers,
> >who can't pass[?].
>
> Gee...when I took my GENERAL (1966) and ADVANCED test exams, I used the ARRL
> license manual which had ALL THE QUESTIONS and ALL THE ANSWERS. Hmmmm.....
I know many people who don't bother with the advanced because they think
the material is too difficult for them. Learning the material is much
easier than memorizing all the questions and answers.
Paul Knupke, Jr. / Pinellas County ARES Asst. EC
knupke@babbage.csee.usf.edu / Pinellas County Skywarn
Largo, FL USA / Fidonet 1:3603/570
Amateur Radio Callsign: KR4YL / Florida Contest Group Member
>From rlboyd@CapAccess.org (Rich L. Boyd) Sun May 26 19:30:42 1996
From: rlboyd@CapAccess.org (Rich L. Boyd) (Rich L. Boyd)
Subject: Our Clique - SK?
Message-ID: <Pine.SUN.3.91-FP.960526142723.3728I-100000@cap1.capaccess.org>
I thought the crowd at the Contest Forum was the biggest I've seen in the
6 years I've been going to Dayton, a good sign.
As I've said before, I think any time we really feel there's a serious
lack of contesters we can each go out and recruit a couple and personally
train them and help them get set up. The PVRC talk I've now given to 10
local clubs in our region has been universally well received.
I have a personal theory that when coaching/tutoring young/new potential
hams we can simultaneously teach beginning contesting, "Ham radio is neat
and I'll teach you about that but let me also teach you about a part of
it that I PARTICULARLY like." Seems reasonable to me.
Do we really have a shortage of contesters? Bands seem pretty chock full
in the major contests and Sweepstakes QSO totals have been up. ?
Rich Boyd KE3Q
>From aa0ob@skypoint.com (Greg Fields) Sun May 26 20:03:00 1996
From: aa0ob@skypoint.com (Greg Fields) (Greg Fields)
Subject: "To IARU FASC"
Message-ID: <m0uNl5u-0002EqC@skypoint.com>
>To: iaru@iaru.org
>From: aa0ob@skypoint.com (Greg Fields)
>Subject: "To IARU FASC"
>Cc: k1zz@arrl.org
>
>I am writing to express my concern for FASC's conculsion that S25.5
>should be dropped. The 1994 IARU CW Ad Hoc Committee concluded that CW remains
>essential for amateurs to communicate regardless of language barriers and
to ensure
>orderly use of the limited sprectrum the amateurs use below 30Mhz. The FASC
>states that a future technical development may provide a alternate method to
>intercommunicate. FASC also states there is a possibility of sufficient
expansion
>to the frequency band allocations of the Amateur Service. I am concerned
how the
>FASC can come to such different conclusion from the CW Ad Hoc Committee in
just two years time.
>
>As for technology giving Amateurs a means to break the language barrier, I have
>no doubt that in the future there will be such a mode of communication. But
first,
>this mode must be designed and implemented. Once it is proven, it will be made
>available to the public. Maybe Amateurs will even come up with the mode.
Being that Amateurs are eager to try new modes of communications, I am sure
it will be used on the Amateur frequencies. It goes without saying that this
communication device will require some form of computer control that will
need to be added to the Amateur's equipment. For the language barrier to be
broken, Amateurs on both ends of the conversation will need this device.
This whole process will take time for the device to become readily available
or the parts available for those who wish to build it. Amateurs in developed
countries will not have problems obtaining the device or parts. But, what
about those in the less developed nations? The implementation of such a
device will no doubt take much longer. Because it will be a computer
controlled, many of the Amateurs in the less developed nations will probably
not have the means to obtain such a device. Still today, many Amateurs in
less developed countries use CW to communicate because the radio required
for CW is simple and cheaper to build or buy than a single side band HF
radio. All that is required to send CW is a simple key. Many of the signals
from the former Soviet Union are not those of commercially available radio
but, home made or converted military radios. I do not think Amateurs of
their means and with less sophisticated equipment will be quick to implement
this new mode of communication. The means to break the language barrier is
already available and widly disprussed to Amateurs worldwide in the form of CW.
>
>FASC states the possibility for sufficient expansion to the frequency
allocations
>to the Amateur Service is not ruled out. The most efficiant use of the
frequency
>allocations of the Amateur Service is in the use of CW. Because it has such a
>small bandwidth compared to single side band transmission, a number of CW
transmissions can take place in the bandwidth only one single side band
transmission can occupy. With the world population exploding, it follows
that the number of Amateur operators will also increase. Even if the Amateur
Service is allocated more frequency allocations, it will be for a larger
number of users than what we have today. The need for efficiant use of
frequency allocations will not decrease thus, the larger number of CW
signals in a given space will still be a important factor. CW insures the
"orderly shared use of a limited resource."
>
>CW is very much alive in the Amateur frequencies below 30 Mhz. To count on a
>new technology that breaks the language barrier to become as widly
dispurssed as CW in the near future is not realistic. CW is the perferred
mode of communications for
>many Amateurs and the most efficiant use of the spectrum. Keeping S25.5
mandatory
>will insure that the frequency allocations of the Amateur Service below 30 Mhz
>will continue to be used efficiantly in the future. When a new technology
becomes
>available that breaks the language barrier, is widly dispurssed to the
Amateur Community, and is a efficiant use of the spectrum, then it will time
to take a hard look at S25.5 again.
>
>Sincerly,
>
>Greg Fields
>
>
>
>
>
Greg Fields AA0OB
aa0ob@skypoint.com
Minneapolis, Minnesota
U.S.A.
>From epps@netcom.com (Charles Epps) Sun May 26 20:07:10 1996
From: epps@netcom.com (Charles Epps) (Charles Epps)
Subject: WRTC Press Release #8
Message-ID: <Pine.3.89.9605261204.A26065-0100000@netcom3>
WRTC-96 PRESS RELEASE #8
Redwood City, CA
May 25, 1996
WRTC-96 ANNOUNCES CHINESE AND LATVIAN EXHIBITION TEAMS
Two exhibition teams have been added to the lineup of stations which will
be active in connection with the World Radiosport Team Championship
competition on July 13 and 14, 1996. Attending from the People's
Republic of China will be BA1OK and BA4RC plus their coach/observer
BA1FB. The PRC team will operate WRTC using the callsign AH3D.
Attending from Latvia will be YL2KL and YL3CW who will sign AH3C in the
competition. Although these two exhibition teams will not be competing
with the 52 official teams (which will be using the 1x1 callsigns W6A
through W6Z and K6A through K6Z), they nonetheless will be operating from
relatively similar stations and generally observing the same rules as the
52 official teams. Anyone working AH3C or AH3D during the competition
may count these stations as "wildcards" for the purpose of qualifying for
the commemorative deck of WRTC playing cards available to those who
contact all 52 different 1x1 WRTC callsigns. AH3C and AH3D may be
substituted for any two 1x1 callsigns otherwise missed.
For additional information about WRTC-96, contact Rusty Epps, W6OAT at
651 Handley Trail, Redwood City, CA 94062, USA or via e-mail at
epps@netcom.com. Past press releases and related WRTC information are
available by sending an e-mail message to wrtc-info@dumpty.nal.go.jp with
the two commands #GET HELP and #GET INDEX on separate lines within the
body of the message. You also may access the WRTC-96 Worldwide Web site
at http://ourworld.compuserve.com/homepages/n6ip
>From aa0ob@skypoint.com (Greg Fields) Sun May 26 20:10:00 1996
From: aa0ob@skypoint.com (Greg Fields) (Greg Fields)
Subject: "To IARU FASC" comments
Message-ID: <m0uNlCc-0002GHC@skypoint.com>
I just sent my copy of the email "To the IARU FASC" to the relector. And of
course, I messed up and didn't attach my comments. You would think since I
work on computers
I could at least get this correct, hi! Here are the comments I intended to
attach.
>The following is the email I sent to the FASC. I too attended the Twin City
>DX Association meeting in which Todd Olson, K0TO, spoke. After listening to
>Todd speak, I believe that he has agonized over how to keep the CW as a
international
>requirement. I think that Todd and the League want to do what's best for
Amateur
>Radio in the long run. How many of you remember that in 1979 our own U.S.
government
>wanted to propose dropping the CW requirement internationally? With the
Leagues
>intervention this proposal never made it to the international level. But, times
>have changed. I remember Todd saying that sometime this year half the number of
>licensed Amateurs would be no coders. And for the U.S. government to view
>the League as the representative of the majority of U.S. Amateurs, these no
coders
>can't be ignored. Todd said the core membership of the League is comprised
of Advanced and Extra class holders who have been licensed for a number of
years. The League
>wants to be true to it's core membership but, the no coders can't be
ignored since
>their numbers are so large.
>
>It was truly a sobering moment for those in attendance when Todd said that even
>the Amateur organizations in Japan and Germany have reported to the League that
>their governments are leaning towards dropping the code requirement. With
governments
>worldwide looking for ways to cut the budget, dropping the CW requirement
means that
>they no longer need someone on staff who knows CW. And if the big nations are
>thinking that, the smaller nations are surly thinking the same.
>
>What can we do? It certainly doesn't help that the FASC's recommends
dropping the
>CW requirement. Make sure you and your friends send in their opinions, we
might as
>well go down fighting! And what if the CW requirment doesn't make the WRC-99
>agenda? Then it is nothing but a breather for us. It will certainly
>make the next WRC. If it is dropped internationally you can count on the
fact that
>as soon as Congress passes the treaty, W5YI and the likes will be partitioning
>for the CW requirement to be dropped by the FCC. We must get our house in
order before
>that happens. Let the League know your suggestions for changing the licensing
>requirements. If we say nothing, than those who want all the privledges
with none
>of the work, will get their way. The next decade is going to be one of
change for
>Amateur Radio. If we do nothing but compain on the reflectors, than a hobby
that
>is very dear to all of us is going to be changed for the worst, forever.
>
Greg Fields AA0OB
aa0ob@skypoint.com
Minneapolis, Minnesota
U.S.A.
>From ke6ber@tiac.net (Alfred J. Frugoli, KE6BER/1) Mon May 27 00:57:25 1996
From: ke6ber@tiac.net (Alfred J. Frugoli, KE6BER/1) (Alfred J. Frugoli,
KE6BER/1)
Subject: TS-940S problem
Message-ID: <v01540b00adce656cf0e1@[206.119.237.58]>
Was operating CQWPX CW this weekend, and having a good time increasing my
code profiency. Problem though. I stopped for dinner tonight (Sunday)
with the intention of not working anymore stations after dinner. But I
changed my mind. Now the problem. When I can back to the shack and
started everything up, the 940 comes on, and looks normal, then after about
a second, the frequency display just shows several periods ". . . . . . .
kHz 0.0kHz". Furthermore, the reciever sounds like it's dead. I've
checked the obvious like the rx ant switch etc. No help. Could this
problem be a result of the "fat thumb" syndrome? Ideas? Did something
happen to my reciever? Oh yeah, it won't transmit either, not ptt, not the
send/rec switch on the front, not vox, nothing. Thanks again.
Al, KE6BER/1, ke6ber@tiac.net http://www.tiac.net/users/ke6ber
>From jreid@aloha.net (Jim Reid) Mon May 27 02:13:28 1996
From: jreid@aloha.net (Jim Reid) (Jim Reid)
Subject: Sent to IARU FASC
Message-ID: <1.5.4.32.19960527011328.00692db8@aloha.net>
After reading nearly everything on the reflectors and newsgroups
these past days about the FASC, I sent the following to both
Dave Sumner, Exc. VP of ARRL and a member of the FASC committee,
and directly to the IARU FASC committee, as Dave had suggested:
Please, let amateurs about the world give these issues about the
future of the amateur radio service/hobby in the 21st century
some serious thought, and then, add your ideas and comments
to what others are saying. Out of all of it, these committees,
the IARU and the ITU will eventuall act, and things will be a
changing!
My first, but probably not final submission:
To the IARU FASC
I would suggest the following to be considered as the world-wide
licensing structure for Amateur Radio in the 21st Century. These
ideas are based upon many ideas I have read on various internet
forums/reflectors in the immediate past days. Little of it
is my own thinking!
Whatever the future Amateur operating spectrum bands are determined
to be made available by the ITU between 1.8 and 30 mHz, each band
should be divided, in some manner (proportions to be determined)
among three types of Amateur operating activiy: CW, digital mode,
and analog mode. All countries will issue only three classes
of Amateur Operating/Station licesnes. The two higher grade
licenses, General and Expert, will be endorsable with one, two or
three operating privilege certifications: CW band access; digital
mode band access; analog mode band access. The licensee may hold any
or all of the endorsements as his interests in learning the material
and passing the tests to earn the endorsements is demonstrated by
appropriate examination.
This idea compilation would result in something similar to the
following set of license classes:
Novice---- 28mhz and up...no code (stimulates HF interest); basic
electronics and radio theory, rules and basic
phone modulation theory (SSB and FM) and
operating procedures tests.
General----- 18mhz and up ...Hold/pass Novice elements as above,
plus HF propogation theory test and
HF band rules as applicable, 18 to 30mHz.,
plus (6-10?)* WPM code for access endorsment
for CW subbands; or, plus digital mode theory
for access endorsment to digital
mode subbands; or, plus analog mode (SSB,
SSTV) theory for access endorsement
to the phone subbands; or any two or all
three privilege endorsements.
Expert---- All Amateur Bands...Hold/pass Novice and General elements
as above, plus advanced radio and lower
band propogation theory; plus (13-18?)* WPM for
access endorsment for CW subbands;
or, plus advanced digital mode theory
for access endorsement to digital mode
subbands; or, plus advanced analog mode
theory for access endorsement to the
phone subbands; or, any two or all
three privilege endorsements.
The phone guys get no CW privileges. The CW guys get no Phone priviliges
until passing the corresponding test in that class to earn the privilege
certification endorsement
All nation's amateurs use the present European amateur band frequency
operating plans. An amateur licensed by any nation signatory to the
ITU treaty, may operate, with his certified operating endorsements,
in any other treaty nation with notification to that nation's proper
authorities.
Such a licensing structure would remove the need for those amateurs
to learn CW code and skills to gain access to any of the world-wide
Amateur Radio Operating HF operating bands, and the frequency
segments available to each type of operating mode would be recognized
by all nations in all bands 1.8 to 30 mHz.
Should a nation choose not to license amateurs for CW operating,
they would have no need to spend money, or otherwise be
troubled by the need to give and certify CW code operation
or skills. They might, for example, choose only to offer
that nation's radio amateurs the analog phone test and operating
license certification privilege: the least costly to them of any of
the three types of license for amateur radio operation.
Just some thoughts for consideration, and to, I hope also defuse
the debate about CW Morse code and the "world-wide reaching"
amateur radio HF spectrum operating service/hobby.
*Note: I added the bracketed code speeds AFTER sending to the IARU and
ARRL; originally sent 8 and 13 wpm. But now am having second thoughts on
the speeds to earn CW band privileges. What do you think about the speeds?
73, Jim Reid, AH6NB
On the Garden Island of Kauai
jreid@aloha.net
-------
Forwarded via the Internet DX Mailing List.
Submissions: dx@ve7tcp.ampr.org
Subscribe/unsubscribe requests: dx-REQUEST@ve7tcp.ampr.org
DX info on the Web: http://ve7tcp.ampr.org/DX/
>From dwshock@usa.net (Doug Shock AA0UF) Mon May 27 02:37:42 1996
From: dwshock@usa.net (Doug Shock AA0UF) (Doug Shock AA0UF)
Subject: TS-940S problem
Message-ID: <Pine.SOL.3.91.960526193430.18346A-100000@earth>
Al, Are you using the IF10B digital Interface? I am also having the same
problems with my 940 and it goes right back to the IF10B. The quick fix
is turn the rig off then on again holding the A=B button. This resets the
VFO. It does seem to be a problem with other 940 owners also but I
haven't come across the answer yet. I you find a permanent fix let me
know please. Oh, Kenwood doesn't seem to have a fix so good luck!
73's
AA0UF/Doug "A closed mouth gathers fewer feet"
>From rlboyd@CapAccess.org (Rich L. Boyd) Mon May 27 02:51:39 1996
From: rlboyd@CapAccess.org (Rich L. Boyd) (Rich L. Boyd)
Subject: ARRL's motivations
Message-ID: <Pine.SUN.3.91-FP.960526214936.23837B-100000@cap1.capaccess.org>
I think ARRL's motivations are, yes, to stay in the black financially,
which any organization has to do, but I think their number one motivation
is to maintain the good health of ham radio. That contesters and DXers
are among the top ARRL leadership is a good sign that they will tend to
represent our interests well. If they were all stricty business people
that we never heard on the air (or worse, did not even have ham licenses)
there would be greater reason for concern about their motivations.
Rich Boyd KE3Q
>From G.DAUGHT@Forsythe.Stanford.EDU (George Daughters) Mon May 27 03:02:37
>1996
From: G.DAUGHT@Forsythe.Stanford.EDU (George Daughters) (George Daughters)
Subject: WPX CW '96
I just gotta comment... I'm probably wrong, as
usual, but........
conditions were the pits. The worst I can
remember (but I've only been a ham for 39 years)
what are some opinions on the "trick" callsigns
(or custom callsigns, or whatever you want to call
them?) good for a new prefix, but hard for me to
copy. What about anybody else? Or should this
be the shortest thread on record?
73, ab6yl
To: CQ-CONTEST@TGV.COM
>From dwshock@usa.net (Doug Shock AA0UF) Mon May 27 03:10:44 1996
From: dwshock@usa.net (Doug Shock AA0UF) (Doug Shock AA0UF)
Subject: Sent to IARU FASC
Message-ID: <Pine.SOL.3.91.960526200551.19089B-100000@earth>
I think the suggestions here are more than fair for the needs of Amatuer
Radio in the future. My question is what would happen to existing
licenses? As an Extra would I have to retest in any special area to obtain
operating rights or would my license be grandfathered?
On Sun, 26 May 1996,
Jim Reid wrote:
> After reading nearly everything on the reflectors and newsgroups
> these past days about the FASC, I sent the following to both
> Dave Sumner, Exc. VP of ARRL and a member of the FASC committee,
> and directly to the IARU FASC committee, as Dave had suggested:
>
> Please, let amateurs about the world give these issues about the
> future of the amateur radio service/hobby in the 21st century
> some serious thought, and then, add your ideas and comments
> to what others are saying. Out of all of it, these committees,
> the IARU and the ITU will eventuall act, and things will be a
> changing!
>
> My first, but probably not final submission:
>
> To the IARU FASC
>
> I would suggest the following to be considered as the world-wide
> licensing structure for Amateur Radio in the 21st Century. These
> ideas are based upon many ideas I have read on various internet
> forums/reflectors in the immediate past days. Little of it
> is my own thinking!
>
> Whatever the future Amateur operating spectrum bands are determined
> to be made available by the ITU between 1.8 and 30 mHz, each band
> should be divided, in some manner (proportions to be determined)
> among three types of Amateur operating activiy: CW, digital mode,
> and analog mode. All countries will issue only three classes
> of Amateur Operating/Station licesnes. The two higher grade
> licenses, General and Expert, will be endorsable with one, two or
> three operating privilege certifications: CW band access; digital
> mode band access; analog mode band access. The licensee may hold any
> or all of the endorsements as his interests in learning the material
> and passing the tests to earn the endorsements is demonstrated by
> appropriate examination.
>
> This idea compilation would result in something similar to the
> following set of license classes:
>
> Novice---- 28mhz and up...no code (stimulates HF interest); basic
> electronics and radio theory, rules and basic
> phone modulation theory (SSB and FM) and
> operating procedures tests.
>
> General----- 18mhz and up ...Hold/pass Novice elements as above,
> plus HF propogation theory test and
> HF band rules as applicable, 18 to 30mHz.,
> plus (6-10?)* WPM code for access endorsment
> for CW subbands; or, plus digital mode theory
> for access endorsment to digital
> mode subbands; or, plus analog mode (SSB,
> SSTV) theory for access endorsement
> to the phone subbands; or any two or all
> three privilege endorsements.
>
> Expert---- All Amateur Bands...Hold/pass Novice and General elements
> as above, plus advanced radio and lower
> band propogation theory; plus (13-18?)* WPM
> for
> access endorsment for CW subbands;
> or, plus advanced digital mode theory
> for access endorsement to digital mode
> subbands; or, plus advanced analog mode
> theory for access endorsement to the
> phone subbands; or, any two or all
> three privilege endorsements.
>
>
>
> The phone guys get no CW privileges. The CW guys get no Phone priviliges
> until passing the corresponding test in that class to earn the privilege
> certification endorsement
>
> All nation's amateurs use the present European amateur band frequency
> operating plans. An amateur licensed by any nation signatory to the
> ITU treaty, may operate, with his certified operating endorsements,
> in any other treaty nation with notification to that nation's proper
> authorities.
>
> Such a licensing structure would remove the need for those amateurs
> to learn CW code and skills to gain access to any of the world-wide
> Amateur Radio Operating HF operating bands, and the frequency
> segments available to each type of operating mode would be recognized
> by all nations in all bands 1.8 to 30 mHz.
>
> Should a nation choose not to license amateurs for CW operating,
> they would have no need to spend money, or otherwise be
> troubled by the need to give and certify CW code operation
> or skills. They might, for example, choose only to offer
> that nation's radio amateurs the analog phone test and operating
> license certification privilege: the least costly to them of any of
> the three types of license for amateur radio operation.
>
> Just some thoughts for consideration, and to, I hope also defuse
> the debate about CW Morse code and the "world-wide reaching"
> amateur radio HF spectrum operating service/hobby.
>
> *Note: I added the bracketed code speeds AFTER sending to the IARU and
> ARRL; originally sent 8 and 13 wpm. But now am having second thoughts on
> the speeds to earn CW band privileges. What do you think about the speeds?
>
> 73, Jim Reid, AH6NB
> On the Garden Island of Kauai
> jreid@aloha.net
>
>
>
>
>
>
> -------
> Forwarded via the Internet DX Mailing List.
>
> Submissions: dx@ve7tcp.ampr.org
> Subscribe/unsubscribe requests: dx-REQUEST@ve7tcp.ampr.org
> DX info on the Web: http://ve7tcp.ampr.org/DX/
>
>
>
73's
AA0UF/Doug "A closed mouth gathers fewer feet"
>From rlboyd@CapAccess.org (Rich L. Boyd) Mon May 27 03:20:17 1996
From: rlboyd@CapAccess.org (Rich L. Boyd) (Rich L. Boyd)
Subject: Cliques and Dayton
Message-ID: <Pine.SUN.3.91-FP.960526221034.23837G-100000@cap1.capaccess.org>
Going to Dayton can be very economical for some of us. For instance,
this year a couple guys needed a room at the last minute...I said they
could have mine if they'd paid the bill and let me sleep in the corner in
my sleeping bag. Cost of the room for me: zero.
When my riders who were going to pick up the gas cost of my pickup truck
decided to get there on their own I changed my plans and got a ride with
N3RR. My cost: zero.
I realizing driving (or riding) may not be attractive an option from
Oregon! Oh well.
Turned out one of my two roommates hadn't been to Dayton before, and a
couple other guys rode out with them who had never been to Dayton. I
enjoyed getting out the program (that I'd picked up at Hara Thursday) and
giving a little tutorial on "musts" for contesters and DXers. I
explained the forums could be hard to find, where and when they were,
etc. and I explained the various hospitality suites, etc. I've said
before first timers to Dayton need a guide (preferably one who shares
their specific ham interests -- like contesting) to make sure they are at
the right places at the right times, and to introduce them to people.
Anyway, it's a long way ahead, but I hereby offer to hold a tutorial for
first time Dayton guys next year at the Crowne Plaza (the old Stouffer's)
on Thursday evening after dinner, and I can repeat it again at Hara Arena
Friday morning if there's interest. And, if you're a new guy to
contesting or to the Dayton affair, you can hang out with me too, and I
promise to introduce you to an all star lineup of big guns. If you're at
Dayton you're already on the big gun spectrum somewhere, and probably ARE
a big gun to someone -- it's all relative after all (go to the local
general interest ham club here in Maryland and you're a big gun if you're
on HF at all, or at least if you have 30, 40, 50 countries!).
I think many of us, even as grown adults, are still shy. I sometimes
joke I'm a member of "shy anonymous," meaning I've largely overcome it,
with work, but feel it's still in me deep down inside somewhere. I
suspect shyness is reason #1 why guys at Dayton don't get more effusive
in their greetings of anyone, but especially of people they don't know.
I suspect we haven't completely grown out of the awkward teenagers we
were in junior high and high school.
So, when you're at Dayton next year, say hi to KE3Q and you can hang out
with me if you want -- oh, but be sure to work me both modes in
Sweepstakes this November first! hi. Just kidding. 73
Rich Boyd KE3Q
>From rlboyd@CapAccess.org (Rich L. Boyd) Mon May 27 03:30:20 1996
From: rlboyd@CapAccess.org (Rich L. Boyd) (Rich L. Boyd)
Subject: young contesting
Message-ID: <Pine.SUN.3.91-FP.960526222613.23837J-100000@cap1.capaccess.org>
Took novice at age 12, was 13 by the time it came. Within a year I
considered myself a contester, but it's taken me a long time (I'm 44 now)
to keep building my station, contesting along the way, but always
thinking of what else I could do to build the station. That's part of
the fun of it, you are able to keep building, rebuilding, improving, etc.
There are those who found a station they could guest single op, or
multiop when they were still teenagers; unfortunately, I missed that
opportunity. I think guest opping is the least costly way to be
competitive. In the MD-DC-VA area I know of 10 stations that are
respectable (some are pretty darn big) and pretty readily available for
guest ops, whether they be seasoned guys or brand new guys, doesn't matter.
In my case, I had studied on my own, didn't know many hams, and just kept
improving my modest little station and contested from home, but all the
time I considered myself a contester, even if few of the other contesters
around knew I existed. 73
Rich Boyd KE3Q
>From rlboyd@CapAccess.org (Rich L. Boyd) Mon May 27 03:53:01 1996
From: rlboyd@CapAccess.org (Rich L. Boyd) (Rich L. Boyd)
Subject: station cost
Message-ID: <Pine.SUN.3.91-FP.960526224626.5164C-100000@cap1.capaccess.org>
You can acquire massive quantities of tower and antennas and rotators,
cables, coax, if you're willing to go out and "prospect" (all the people
who had a TV tower/antenna and went to cable or satellite dish) and are
willing to take it down. My phone hasn't stopped ringing since the word
got around I was willing to do that -- hams retiring to Florida, or SKs,
etc. -- many people are glad to have someone come take it down. I
acquired 4,000' of tower over several years time, a workbench full of
rotators -- traded 12 of them for an FT-1000 recently, etc. And, the
biggest bargain around in amplifiers is the old, homebrew 3-1000 or
4-1000 amp someone made, that they're willing to sell for $300 now! And,
I've seen Drake C-Lines, which I still think are pretty fine, even stock,
go for as little as $250 in mint condition (though $350, $400, or more
are more typical).
Building a station doesn't have to be ridiculously expensive, if you're
willing to "pay for it" in other ways, like scrounging, taking stuff
down, etc.
The biggest expense may be the acreage you may want to have, versus
living in an apartment or townhouse. Well, the next time you decide to
move, you may want to put in a little more work finding a larger piece of
ground, with no anti-antenna covenants, etc. Many guys drive much
farther to work than they would otherwise have to, so they can have an
antenna farm. And you don't have to have massive amounts of land -- you
can have a very good station on an acre (though more is more
convenient!). Still, though it was 15 years ago, I got my modest place
on 3-1/3 acres with only $800 down, and that was at a relative peak in
real estate values, and in a relatively expensive area (Washington, D.C.
suburbs). The price I paid was equally modest...bargains are always
around but you have to do your homework by really shopping and learning
the market so you can recognize a bargain when you see it. 73
Rich Boyd KE3Q
|